So, I've been quote-mined. Should I feel honored? Meh. He definitely missed the point, and himself cherry picked my posts.
Someone should enlighten him to the fact that-
" =/= "close affiliation
in fact, those two things are quite the opposite of each other, hence my post remains perfectly consistent, while it is White himself that is attempting to rewrite some history here, in a manner of speaking. And btw, "disparate" is the word I used
, not "separate". Slight yet significant difference there, but whatever.
His proposed defense against the innumerable instances of these gods with groups of twelve(and often together, so no, like I said, they are not disparate) is that there are other instances of these gods with groups of other numbers. This is something I don't recall any of us having ever denied, and I myself certainly never did, and btw, on that point, he was very slick in trying to lump Acharya and myself and those of us on this board all together as though we all speak for Acharya or vice-versa or something to that effect. In fact, I for one do not recall myself ever having stated that Horus had "twelve disciples
", just groups of twelve. I even went back and did a word search on my posts here just to be thorough, and sure enough nothing came up. Anyway, even some of those other numbers, while I can't attest to every number, some of those other numbers also seem to be symbols of various things, some astronomical or divisions of time, etc., such as 14 correlating with the days between full moon and new moon(as per Plutarch), or 9 correlating with the Ennead, and so on. And as I've said, the number 12 isn't arbitrary either, as some of the scholarly citations I've given before confirm, the recurrence of 12 here in the Amduat hours represent the 12 hours of night & 12 hours of day. Hell, the Amduat is divided into TWELVE sections for that very reason
, as anyone familiar with texts on the matter is aware. Twelve is not happenstance, it's intentional.
And btw, those four "disciples" Chris speaks of are most likely Horus's four SONS(Pyr.Texts Utt.580:1548)
, as I have never heard of him having four disciples explicitly by that word any more than I have heard of him stated to have had twelve "disciples" explicitly by that word(<now there's a statement that's sure to get quote-mined out of context, lol). However, I've read and seen several instances of Horus having four sons, so, while I'm not certain atm, I am quite confident in guessing that this is actually what Chris had in mind. So he's either mistaken and is himself just cherry picking a disparate element of Horus to try and throw into the discussion here, or he has no problem considering "sons" to be "disciples", so why is he harping on anyone for pointing out the twelve gods and twelve goddesses in the picture, just like Hornung and other Egyptologists already did before any of us ever did? If "sons" can be called "disciples" by Chris, why can "gods" not be called "disciples" by Murdock(assuming that's actually what she even said).
Chris's proposed defense there I just mentioned earlier is not sufficient, since the same could be stated of Jesus or OT motifs.
Chris continued to assert that it was a cut off picture of 24, even though we already proved beyond any possibility of rebuttal that it was a group of twelve gods with Horus, and a distinct group of twelve goddesses with the crocodile, facing the opposite direction of the twelve gods, and scholars like Hornung confirmed as much.
Chris is arguing against the evidence & parsimony. His argumentation is just as ridiculous as if someone brought up Matthew 19:28 to show Jesus has 12 disciples who will sit on 12 thrones judging the 12 tribes, but then Chris comes along and tries to use Revelation 4:4 & 10 to say that this is wrong and Jesus actually has 24 disciples who will sit on 24 thrones, so no 12 disciples, it's 24 and anyone citing Matthew 19:28 is cutting the number off.
That of course would be ridiculous. In fact, if there even is a correlation between Matt 19:28 & Rev 4:4,10, most bible commentaries I've read say there are twenty-four thrones because there is some other group of 12, perhaps 12 patriarchs or something to that effect. So two distinct groups of twelve. There being 24 thrones in Rev 4:4 does NOT nullify that Matt 19:28 says twelve, nor does Matt 19:28 deny, or prohibit the possibility of, there being another group of 12 as well. Matthew 19:28 is not "cutting off" anything.
So, as I said a moment ago, the same thing Chris tried can be done with Jesus. Jesus can be shown to have twelve disciples. He can also be shown to have had seventy followers, or seventy-two based on certain manuscripts. Acts 1:15 says he had up to 120 followers at Pentecost after his ascension. Matthew 17:1 and 26:37 depict him with three disciples. John 21:2 depicts him with seven disciples. Yet John 12:19 says his followers included "the whole world"(NIV).
This same thing can be done with the Old Testament. Sure there were(to borrow another's list)...
The 12 Princes of Ishmael,
The 12 Sons of Jacob,
The 12 Tribes of Israel,
The 12 Prophets and Kings of Israel,
The 12 Wells of Water,
The 12 Pillars of the Lord,
The 12 Stones of the Breastplate,
The 12 Cakes of the Tabernacle,
The 12 Princes of Israel,
The 12 Oxen of the Tabernacle,
The 12 Chargers of Silver, Bowls of Silver and Spoons of Gold,
The 12 Bullocks, Rams, Lambs and Kids of the Offering,
The 12 Rods of the Princes of Israel,
The 12 Stones of Joshua,
The 12 Cities,
The 12 Judges of Israel,
The 12 Pieces of the Concubine,
The 12 Servants of David,
The 12 Officers of Solomon,
The 12 Lions of Solomon,
The 12 Pieces of Jeroboam‘s Garment,
The 12 Stones of Elijah,
The 12 Bronze Bulls of Solomon,
but there were also...
The 7 days of the week,
The 7 fold vengence of Cain,
The 7 pairs of clean animals boarding the ark,
The 7 days til the rain began,
The 7th month when the ark rested on Ararat,
The 7 lambs Abraham gave to Abimelek,
The 7 years Jacob worked for Leah and then Rachel,
The 7 times Jacob bowed to Esau,
The 7 cows and 7 ears of corn in Pharoah's dream,
The 7 years of plenty then the 7 years of famine,
The 7 daughters of Jethro, priest of Midian,
The 7th year of liberation for Hebrew slaves,
The 7 days of the Feast of Unleavened bread,
The 7 candlesticks of the Menorah,
The 7 altars of Balaam,
The 7 braids of Samson's hair,
etc., etc., etc.,
as well as...
The 70 nations descended from the sons of Noah,
The 70 of Jacob that went into Egypt
The 70 days of mourning for Jacob(also the number of days for mummification, coincidentally),
The 70 palm trees at Elim,
The 70 elders under Moses,
The 70 shekels of measurement,
The 70 kings under Adoni-Bezek,
The 70 sons of Jerub-Baal,
The 70 thousand who died in David's plague,
The 70 bulls sacrificed under Hezekiah,
The 70 years in Babylon,
The 70 weeks of Daniel's prophecy,
The 70 translators of the Septuagint,
etc., etc., etc.,
The 40 days of rain during the flood,
The 40 years of age when Isaac married Rebekah,
The 40 years of Esau when he married Judith,
The 40 cows Jacob gave to Esau,
The 40 years in the wilderness,
The 40 days Moses was up on Sinai,
The 40 silver bases for the tabernacle,
The 40 days of surveying Canaan,
The 40 thousand soldiers that crossed the Jordan on over to Jericho,
The 40 years of peace under Othniel,
The 40 years under the Philistines,
The 40 years David was a king,
etc., etc., etc.
There are several other recurring numbers in the Bible, and each with their own alleged typological or prophetic significance. Yet the existence and significance of one of these numbers, does not nullify the existence and significance of another.
Just because Jesus had 70 or 72 followers, does this mean he did NOT have twelve disciples?
Of course not.
Does it mean someone is singling out an insignificant arbitrary number by referring to "twelve" disciples?
Of course not.
Does the fact that there are several other numbers of typological/prophetic significance in the Old Testament nullify the doctrine that the number of twelve disciples was most likely influenced by the twelve tribes of Israel or even all the other occurrences of twelve in the Old Testament?
Of course not.
And nor would the same be true of any other possible sources of influence on either the Old or New Testament just because it has several other repeating typological numbers besides just twelve. Those other numbers do not nullify or downplay the significance of twelve that this other potential source of influence still had, and did have even before the Old Testament was ever even written.
Also, Chris said the curator debunked Acharya(or something to that effect), even though we had already showed that the curator was mistaken, and we did so with scholarly sources as well as the primary source.
Yet Chris also continued to follow suit from her and refer to the god there as Ra-Horakhty when I had showed translations of the god's name there, which was "Horus, master of the stars and hours", NOT "Horus of the two horizons"(Horakhty). And Ra's name doesn't come up at all right there.
Try and ignore the number twelve in the following few examples(of many) or argue that the number has no special significance here. To do so would be to resist Occam's razor, just as it would be to argue against the significance of twelve in the Bible-
Oh, here is a depiction of Jesus with only... seven disciples?
Or only five?
Or here with just three?
And here again with only three!
Yet here with only ONE!
But then here he is depicted with a multitude!
So therefore, following Chris's [il]logic, those depictions of Jesus with other numbers of people render any significance of this depiction of Jesus with twelve null & void, and thus references to Jesus with twelve are just Christians cherry picking texts or images of Jesus with an arbitrary number that has no biblical/typological significance whatsoever.